Sully

I don't think anyone was consciously anticipating a film collaboration between Clint Eastwood and Tom Hanks. However, once Hanks was cast in the leading role of "Sully", I think we all thought that it was about time. I wanted to see Eastwood's last movie before seeing this one. Thanks to a new video streaming service that applies filters, I did see "American Sniper" for the first time the week before I saw "Sully". The former film is more visually striking than the latter but both movies have a strong sense of realism. "The Miracle on the Hudson" is a story that was going to be adapted by Hollywood eventually and as with any true story being told, dramatic license is usually taken. The depiction of the event itself however appears to be true to life, involving a few of the actual participants. "Sully" is the first movie to be filmed almost entirely with digital IMAX cameras by the way.

I would like to take a moment to explain why I also consider this incident to be a "miracle". If this were to happen in any other city, it might also have ended well but perhaps not when you consider how fast hypothermia can set in. More importantly, it is not just where this event took place that makes it feel miraculous but also when. If it had happened back in the 90's, it might have been given less press and attention, even if it happened in the Hudson. To have this emergency landing take place so near Manhattan within the decade after 9/11 and be so successful feels inexplicable. By the way, I first saw this movie on September 12th. Traditionally on the date before, I watch "United 93". Furthermore, two days before I saw "Sully", I re-watched "World Trade Center" as well. The opening scene therefore was particularly powerful for me and it felt like the nightmare that it was. For me, the outcome of this event was miraculous but it was made more so with the location and era in which it happened. This was a city that needed to have an aviation miracle. You can see it in the faces of those in the Manhattan skyscrapers as they watch the plane flying too low and too close to the island. Considering the economic hardships at the start of 2009, this event was also therapeutic for the whole country. It was also important to depict those who came to the rescue because, as Sully points out at the end of the movie, this was a story that involved multiple heroes and people. Speaking of them, the ferry operator in the movie is the actual man whose ferry was first to arrive. Other cities don't have the ferry system that Manhattan does and this contributed to the miracle. Captain Sully landed his plane near ferry lines, which allowed for a quick rescue but it should be noted that it was hard to do this on purpose with both engines dead. This film has a non-linear plot, much like Eastwood's "Flags of Our Fathers" or "J. Edgar". The landing and rescue itself are shown in the middle of the movie but the landing in the Hudson is depicted again at the end of the movie. Because it is shown again from the perspective of Sully and Skiles, we still get a climax. By the way, I love the line during the climax that references something the safety board said earlier in the film: "Does anyone need to see anymore simulations?" I also like the one flashback shot from behind the plane as Sully turns it away from the buildings towards the river. The drama and conflict of the movie is created by the fact that an actual hero has his reputation in jeopardy because of doubters in high places. Considering the aforementioned recession, this was not a time for Sully to lose his job. While watching the film, I could tell that in real life the NTSB took the human element into account from the get go. I assumed that fictional licensing was being taken and after researching when the movie was over, I found that I was right. One member of the board actually called this incident "the most successful ditching in aviation history". Unfortunately, the NTSB doesn't believe that the majority of moviegoers will likewise account for creative licensing. The Board felt incorrectly depicted by the film and I guess I don't blame them. When I think about it, the filmmakers could have created suspense by alternatively having Sully in the dark as to what conclusions the board was going to make. The board could have asked realistic questions in a straightforward manner but then Sully on his own starts to doubt his actions in his mind and he worries about what the board would ultimately decide. The climax would then be a relief when in the hearing the board concludes that Sully and Skiles made the right decision. The important thing to remember about any movie script is that if no drama is created, why make the movie in the first place? The final script has the needed drama and unfortunately, the NTSB was depicted as antagonists. Fortunately, they are not depicted as villains. Personally, I think the NTSB are justifiably concerned about their reputation but they should also understand that not everyone who sees this movie will look down on them. As a small note, I was impressed by how the Letterman clip was created. David was not filmed for this movie but he was superimposed by using archival footage from the actual interview he gave to the crew of Flight 1549. The actors in this movie were filmed on a blue screen set. I also got a kick out of the scene in Times Square and there is an advertisement for the "Gran Torino" (directed by Clint Eastwood and released a month before the events of the true story). The ad however is not lit up as bright others on the street and that was Eastwood being historically accurate while not appearing self-serving.

Tom Hanks is good with practically every role he undertakes and his performance as Captain Chesley Sullenberger is no exception. Sometimes, the small acting choices he makes causes you to forget it's him in the movie like in "Saving Mr. Banks" or "Forrest Gump". Other times, like on "Captain Phillips" or "Saving Private Ryan", you are conscious of Tom Hanks in the role. "Sully" is the latter case but that doesn't mean Hanks did poorly. In fact, he did as well as you would expect from him. Aaron Eckhart on the other hand slipped into his character better than any other major actor in the movie. It is interesting how Hanks and Laura Linney have no scenes together in "Sully"; all of their scenes together have them talking to each other on the phone. I mentioned how this film is not as visually conspicuous as past Eastwood films. The color scheme in "Sully" has the typical sharp whites but the other colors in the movie are not toned down as much as I was expecting. Nevertheless, Eastwood's talent for depicting realism was maintained. Because he doesn't believe in rehearsing very much, the rescue scene comes across quite realistically. The same compliment can be said for "Invictus". It was cool that Frank Marshall was a producer on this movie. As a final note, this movie garnished an Oscar nomination for its sound editing.

Despite how big "American Sniper" was financially, it had a three week limited run release that "Sully" never got. This made the debut of "Sully" the biggest yet of Eastwood's career either as an actor or director. The movie contains a great story and it entertains you right until the end. The true story is dramatized a little but not as much as other true stories depicted on the big screen. The sense of realism is not sacrificed. It is usually fun when two legendary filmmakers collaborate and Tom Hanks in a Clint Eastwood-directed movie was a treat.

4 Stars